Waste Transfer Stations (WTS) are an intermediate facility where waste can be delivered by various means and Users. Waste at a WTS can be inspected and sorted to varying degrees prior to being transferred to another location for treatment, reprocessing, recycling or landfill. The objective of the sorting is to provide diversion of waste and where practical:                1) Recycle or reuse extracted materials;        2) Segregate into Waste Types and        3) prevent materials that are hazardous, prohibited or toxic from entering the waste stream.        
Regulations, compliance and environmental demands are putting even greater punitive, social and commercial pressures to:                1) maximize Reuse and Recycling to divert volume form landfill.        2) Improve safety at WTS.        3) Intercept and control problem and Hazardous waste that represent a public health risk and contaminate bulk waste storage.        
Existing methods employed at WTS have struggled to improve in these areas as they were not part of their original design intent.
How a Waste Transfer Station Works?
Refuse is delivered to WTS by various entities including but not limited to commercial Operators, and the general public. Once the delivered waste material is sorted, it is loaded and often compacted into larger vehicles for direct delivery to it's another location for; reprocessing, recycling, reuse, treatment or landfill.
Generally there are three major types of systems employed in transfer stations today. Each WTS or local authority may describe these differently or may use a combination of these systems at any particular WTS site. These three methods are described as follows:    1) Push Pits are most commonly used particularly in larger scale WTS. Typically they involve substantial built structures and a main covered transfer area. The Users on these sites reverse their vehicle close to the pit and either tip the contents directly into the pit or throw the waste into the pit by hand. The pit is a common/multi user pit for bulk waste. A heavy machine, often a dozer or loader operates in the pit crushing the material and pushing it into a bulk bin located at the ends of the pit. Once the materials are in the pit it is no longer safe to inspect or recover materials for diversion or to extract prohibited materials. Diversion, segregation and compliance can only in the user area before depositing in the pit while on the Users vehicle providing little opportunity for the operator to manage the contents of an inbound load. Fees at WTS are typically governed by the type of waste. Users invariably do not declare wastes that incur a higher disposal charge, unless the operator stands over the user for the duration of their visit the Operators have little chance of policing and refuting the type of waste claimed by the user. As a result Operators potentially under charge or miss a fine or recovery cost to the user for dumping prohibited materials. To compound the inefficiencies of the system in terms of maximizing diversion, any contaminate added to the Pit by a user can result in the entire contents of the pit requiring quarantining and special treatment. Operators in particular are at risk from prohibited materials and how they react when being impacted with machinery, for example: rupturing chemical containers (Including Batteries), exploding Gas Bottles and generated Asbestos dust.            There are numerous recorded safety issues with this type transfer station primarily associated with manual handling by Users, falls into the pit/bin and operator activity in the pit.            2) Direct to Bulk Bins system usually provides a platform for a user that is elevated relative to the bulk bin that their waste is to be deposited into. This may be achieved by having a raised platform for the user or a lowered platform or pit for the bin. The user of these facilities usually picks up the materials by hand from their vehicle and then throws the waste into the bulk bin. Once the material is in the bin it is no longer safe to inspect or recover materials. Prohibited materials once in the bin are difficult to detect, if they are detected they render the entire contents of the bin contaminated. The same user safety and fees issues that are inherent in the Push Pit exist in Direct to Bulk Bins.    3) Flat floor transfer stations require the user to deposit their waste typically onto a common mound of waste on a floor. The waste is then sorted by Operators manually or by machine for bulkier items. This type of facility is inherently unsafe as public, Operators and machinery are co-mingling in the process and there is no containment of potentially hazardous materials. The labor intensive nature of the operation increases the potential for operator injury. Users are depositing their waste typically direct into a common waste pile if an operator is not watching the user it is difficult to attribute to any particular user to the types of waste including prohibited and Hazardous materials evident in the waste pile are. If prohibited materials are detected they render the entire contents of the Bulk Waste Stream contaminated impacting the operation and the capacity of the WTS. If the prohibited materials are chemicals, then there is limited potential to contain or quarantine. Similar user safety and fees issues that are inherent in the Push Pit and Direct to Bulk Bins exist with this method. Because of the safety issues inherent in this method it is less used today.    4) Various adaptation have been developed for the above methods, particularly for the more common push pit and direct to bin methods, in an effort to improve the effectiveness of the above methods. Some examples of such adaptations are:            1) Retractable floors over a Bulk Waste Bin or Pit have been trialed where waste is placed on the cover/floor for delivery and inspection, when retracted waste is allowed to fall into the pit or bin. The system is very costly, inherently susceptible to fault and highly reliant on procedural measures for safety. Diversion Operators need to work in the user space in order to recover any materials and any materials identified for diversion need to be moved around in the user area delaying the availability of the bay and reducing the capacity of the WTS. This puts Users, Operators, delivery vehicles and recovery machinery all in the same space, this in inherently unsafe. Prohibited or Toxic materials particularly chemicals are not contained by this system if they are identified the shutdown of a bay can be protracted while remediating.        2) Another alternative that has been employed is the use of Walking floors or conveyor system where Users deposit their waste directly to these systems. These systems are inherently dangerous as they are routinely moving the waste to a Pit or Bulk bin. Due to safety issues, waste delivered onto one of these systems cannot be accessed for sorting for diversion or recycling. These systems are capital intensive are susceptible to break down given the mechanical electrical nature of their operation. Deposited hazardous or contaminated materials can result in the entire facility being shut down until remediated. Fundamentally these systems are limited in achieving the objective of enhancing diversion, improving compliance or recycling.        3) Alternatively, a fixed mechanical tipping platform has been used to lift and tip the waste into a pit or bin directly behind the tipper bin. There are several different systems that have been trialed including waist height bins and flat bottom tray buckets. These systems allow for inspection before adding to the co-mingled waste stream however safety issues in the work area limit the potential to act on what is identified. To improve Diversion and recycling Operators are required to work in the user space to recover any materials. Any materials identified for diversion need to be moved through the user area. This puts Users, Operators, delivery vehicles and recovery machinery all in the same space, this in inherently unsafe. With regards to toxic dangerous or prohibited materials because of the fixed nature of the bin/tray quarantining the unit in order to remediate renders a portion of the facility inoperable diminishing the entire WTS's capacity. These systems are fixed, very costly, inherently susceptible to fault and highly reliant on procedural measures for safety as a result they have not gained broad acceptance. The need to do all the recovery work in the user space appreciably reduces the capacity of the plant as much more time is needed to address each bins potential before the next user can use the bay.        
Waste transfer stations are a critical part of waste management today.
There are various solutions in the market as noted above in relation to the range of WTS solutions available to manage waste. It is apparent that the solutions that dominate the market are capital intensive, have numerous unresolved safety issues and provide substantial constraints on the ability for the operator to improve diversion and limit/control prohibited materials.
While attempts have been made to adapt existing facilities to improve compliance, safety and diversion, none have been wholly successful in addressing all of the identified issues significantly, either individually, as a sub-group or whole.
One other characteristic of existing technologies is that they tend to have a substantial portion of fixed constructed plant in order to make them work. None of the existing technologies are truly modular and re-locatable as the MWTS that is the subject of this invention.